| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 423/08 |
| Hearing date | 12 Dec 2008 |
| Determination date | 12 December 2008 |
| Member | R Arthur |
| Representation | M Mitchell ; B Edwards |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Mercer v Maori Television Service |
| Summary | INTERIM INJUNCTION – Application for interim reinstatement – Applicant dismissed for repeated lateness and unsatisfactory performance – Applicant had history of lateness – Mediated agreement after applicant received final warning – Agreement required regular performance reviews and notification of absences or lateness to managers – Agreement provided for dismissal if obligations breached – Applicant dismissed for breach of agreement and unsatisfactory performance – Applicant claimed dismissal unjustified – Authority found arguable case – Found balance of convenience favoured respondent – Late application for interim reinstatement – Damages adequate remedy – Applicant found new employment to maintain skills – Interests of replacement operator hired by respondent taken into account – Authority acknowledged applicant’s lateness impacted on respondent’s ability to work tight schedules – Found overall justice favoured respondent – Applicant’s case not strong – Repeated lateness weakened claim – Permanent reinstatement not undermined by applicant’s skills becoming “rusty” – Possibility of permanent reinstatement not affected – Application for interim reinstatement declined – Camera Operator |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Injunction |
| Statutes | ERA s3;ERA s101;ERA s127(4) |
| Cases Cited | Taylor v Air New Zealand Ltd unreported Colgan J, 28 September 1994, AEC 59/94;X v Y Ltd & NZ Stock Exchange [1992] 1 ERNZ 863 |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 423_08.pdf [pdf 27 KB] |